„^ovoFCONGBESS 




014A10 539 5 - 



Hollinger 
pH S3 



F 99 
.H85 
Copy 1 



V 



DESPOTIC DOCTRINES 



DECLARED BT THE 



UNITED STATES SENATE, 



EXPOSED; 



AND 



SENATOR DIXON UNMASKED. 



HARTFORD: 
PRESS OF CASE, LOCKWOOD & COMPANY. 

1863. 






Despotic Doctrines Declared by the United 
States Senate, Exposed; 



AND 



SENATOR DIXON UNMASKED. 



Republicans of Connecticut : 

111 accordance with my promise to many of you, I now 
present a statement of the action of the Senate upon my 
nomination for Collector of Internal Revenue for this district; 
of the connection of Senator Dixon therewith, and of his 
relations to the republican party. I have deferred its publi- 
cation until the present time, that your attention might 
not be diverted from your duties in our late memorable 
State canvass. 

I had hoped that the Senate would lift the veil from its 
proceedings by removing the injunction of secrecy, but it has 
not seen fit to do so. I am, however, able to present the 
material facts, from information collected from various reli- 
able sources while I was in Washington. 

If the matter concerned myself only, I should have been 
disinclined to press it upon the public attention. But the 
facts will show that Senator Dixon in prostituting his official 
trust for his own personal ends, has brought reproach 
upon our State — that he is hostile to the republican faith, 
and is conspiring to destroy its organization and power. And 
that in his efforts to prevent my confirmation, the Senate has 
been induced to announce principles subversive of the consti- 
tution, and abhorrent to every man who is not willing to re- 
nounce his freedom, and become a vassal. 

1 ..,.., 






The appointment was recommended to the President by our 
governor, lieutenant governor, the other state officers, speak- 
er of the assembly with other members of the legislature, and 
by the leading business men of the district. And their 
recommendations were endorsed by Secretaries Chase and 
Welles. The President gave Mr. Dixon and his friends a 
full hearing upon the subject, and then, with a comprehen- 
sive knowledge of all the facts, including those relating to 
our local political relations, the President made the appoint- 
ment. All appeared satisfied. And so well satisfied was the 
Secretary of the Treasury with the administration of the 
duties of the office that he earnestly urged senators to con- 
firm the President's nomination. 



HOW SENATOR DIXON PREVENTED CONFIRMATION. 

Until Senator Dixon's first demonstration of hostility in 
the secret session of the Senate, it was not known by any one 
here that the President's nomination was to be opposed, ex- 
cept by the few in the confidence of the senator. But upon 
visiting Washington, and conversing with senators, the nomi. 
nee found that Senator Dixon had been engaged almost 
entirely, for months, in making personal appeals to republican 
senators, political appeals to democratic and border-state sena- 
tors, and aided by personal arrangements, social appliances, 
and gross misrepresentations, he had succeeded in binding a 
large portion of the senators to vote against my confirmation. 

With the other means employed by Senator Dixon for the 
accomplishment of his purpose, he exhibited letters to sena- 
tors as spontaneous expressions of public sentiment adverse 
to the confirmation of the nominee, which were written in 
response to his own letters, and upon his oivn statements 
against him. 

BOGUS LETTER AND TELEGRAM. 

Senator Howard of Michigan, having known me from 
my boyhood, it was deemed especially necessary to convince 



him that the appointment was an unpopular one. And 
after the first vote on the nomination, Mr. Dixon presented to 
him wliat purported to be a telegraphic dispatch from Hart- 
ford, saying that guns had been, or were then being fired 
there, over my rejection ! He also exhibited to the same 
senator a letter purporting to come from the chairman of the 
Repiiblican State Committee, the substance of which was an 
earnest request to Senator Dixon to defeat my confirmation ! 

That such a dispatch and such a letter were presented to 
Senator Howard, by Senator Dixon, I have been repeatedly 
assured hij Senator Howard liimself. 

The following letter sliows that no such guns were fired, 
nor was any such letter written by the chairman of the Re- 
publican State Committee : 

Hartford, March 3, 1863. 

Mark Howard, Esq. — Dear Sir: In answer to your inquiries, 
I will only say that I have never written Mr. Dixon, or any other 
senator or person whomsoever, urging or advising your rejection, nor 
have any guns been fired or any other public demonstration been 
made in this state on account of your rejection by the Senate. 

J. G. BATTERSON, 

Chairman State Central Committee. 

For the sake of the character of our State, it is hoped that 
Senator Dixon will be able to satisfactorily explain these 
matters.* 

How truthfully the senator represented the public senti- 
ment of his own town in this case, may be judged by the fact, 
that the Republican Town Committee declined to permit him 
to preside at one of the large meetings in Hartford during the 
late state canvass, and on the ground, too, that the general feel- 
ing against him would not allow it. His voice was not heard 
during the whole contest — anywhere. — While the energies of 
every patriotic man and woman in the State, as well as those 

* Since the first publication of these statements, Mr. Dixon has denied that he 
exhibited such letter and telegram to Senator Howard, — the only statements in 
the address which he has controverted, over his name. But as an investigation 
into his private explanations of this matter has not proved satisfactory, the state- 
ment is retained in this pamphlet. 



that came to our aid from other States, were taxed to their 
utmost power to save the State, Senator Dixon ivas silent I * 

THE DOCTRINE OP SENATORIAL AUTOCRACY. 

The thing which finally enabled Senator Dixon to succeed 
in defeating a confirmation of the President's nomination, was 
an appeal to Senators^ love of poiuer. It was urged that 
every senator should control the federal appointments in his 
own locality, and that his objection should be conclusive 
against a nominee. This suggestion to senators of the means 
for crushing out opposition to them at home, and of increas- 
ing and of perpetuating their own power, proved to be irresist- 
ible to a number who could not be influenced by other con- 
siderations, — and accordingly, with them. Senator Dixon's 
objection to me settled the matter, — without reference to the 
merits of the case. Leading senators informed me that it 
was this that prevented my confirmation. 

If the Senate had embodied this principle in a resolution it 
would read as follews : 

Hesolved, V>y the Senate, that every senator shall have the right to 
control all the federal appointments in his own locality, and therefore 
his objection to a nominee shall be conclusive against such nominee, 
without reference to his merits. 

Is not this a virtual annihilation of the constitutional rights 
of the President in respect to appointments requiring the 
action of the Senate ? And are the American people prepared 
for this advance of senatorial despotism, to crush out popular 
liberty, and make a man's eligibility to office depend upon his 
servility to his senator ? Thus is every senator constituted 
the autocrat of his own locality ! And, under this principle, 
but few Republicans in Hartford would be deemed eligible for 
any appointment requiring the action of the Senate.* 

THE DOCTRINE OF SENATORIAL INFALLIBILITY. 

No charge was made from any source, that the nominee 
was wanting either in "honesty, capacity or fidelity" — Sena- 

* The only paper in the State, (excepting the New Hayen "Register," a bitter 
opposition sheet,) that defends Mr. Dixon's action in this case is his own organ, 
the Hartford " Courant "—on& of the proprietors of which was an applicant for the 
office, and conspired with the senator to prevent the confirmation of the late col- 
lector. 



tor Dixon was forced to admit that I possessed those qualifi- 
cations — and was a zealous supporter of the government. 
But alleged that I was personally opposed to him, and 
for this he asked my rejection. His allegations to differ- 
ent persons as to the character of this opposition, were 
various — some of them were sad distortions of the truth, 
and some without any foundation in truth. And he ivas 
unwilling to have the case and his own statements investi- 
gated. That I might not have the usual hearing before the 
committee of the Senate to whom such nominations are refer- 
red, he told Senator Fessenden, when called upon, tliat he 
had no objections to present to it, and consequently the 
finance committee unanimously reported in favor of con 
firmation. But Senator Dixon only waited until he had an 
opportunity to assail lue in secret session of tlie Senate, where 
he hoped to strilce me down without my having any opportu- 
nity to defend myself. He did thus assail me, and carried a 
majority of the Senate against confirmation. But by the 
timely action of Senator Foster, the case was suspended on a 
motion to reconsider. And learning Senator Dixon's allega- 
tions, I sent in a written appeal to the Senate, through Sena- 
tor Fessenden, to have the case recommitted to the finance 
committee, that it miglit be fully investigated, and all allega- 
tions, from whatever source, be inquired into. I also pro- 
mised to demonstrate to the committee that the opposition 
had arisen from my active support of the government. I 
also asked to be personally examined. Senator Fessenden, 
chairman of the finance committee, urged the justice of 
granting this request, as my assailant had deprived me of a 
hearing before the committee, in the manner above stated. 
What, fallow citizens, do you think was the response to this 
appeal for common justice ? It was, that to recommit for ex- 
amination into the statements of a Senator would be an im- 
peachment of his veracity, and hence, an assault upon the 
dignity of the Senate ! 

If this principle was announced in the form of a resolution 
it would read about as follows : 



Resolved, by the Senate, that whatever allegations a Senator may 
make against any person not a member of this body, they can not be 
the subject of examination — as it would be an impeachment of the 
veracity of such Senator, and an assault upon the dignity of this 
body. 

Thiis are Senators virtually declared to be infallible by the 
Senate. And thus is inaugurated, in this country, the doc- 
trine that " the king can do no wrong." This places every 
man at the mercy of a Senator who can assail and crush him 
by false statements, and the victim can not expose their false- 
hood to the Senate, as any such attempt would be an assault 
upon the dignity of the Senate ! Can any man submit to 
such a doctrine, unless he is willing to be a crouching slave ? 

THE POLITICAL COMPLEXION OF THE VOTE. 

Senator Dixon, by his arrangements and appeals, succeeded 
in carrying against my confirmation all the "border state" and 
"democratic" senators, excepting Senator Rice. But such 
noble champions of republicanism as Fessenden, Sumner, 
Wilson, King, Wilmot, Wade, Howard, Chandler, Trumbull, 
Grimes, Wilkinson, with others (not certainly known), be- 
sides Senator Foster, voted for confirmation. And some of 
these Senators boldly and eloquently denounced the wrong 
done not only to the nominee, but to the character of the 
Senate itself, for the gratification of the private feelings of a 
senator. And Senator Foster, prompted by a sense of justice, 
eloquently denounced the injustice of the Senate, earnestly 
labored for my confirmation, and faithfully rcpresente-i the 
views of our citizens, as expressed in their remonstrances* 
against my rejection. He did much towards redeeming the 
character of our state from the disgrace inflicted upon it by 
the conduct of his colleague. 

Thus you have a history of the case, as far as the appoint- 
ment and the action of the Senate are concerned. 



*Sce appendix for remonstrance of tax payers. 



HIS MOTIVES. 

Senator Dixon had several motives in defeating my con- 
firmation : 

1st. To gratify his malignity, and weaken the influence of 

the nominee. 

2d. To terrorize and break the spirit of the earnest repub- 
licans of the state. 

3d. To create an impression that he was omnipotent at 
Washington, so far as the dispensation of federal patronage 
in this state is concerned, that he might bring to his feet all 
the office-holders, and all others desiring government favors, 
—to gratify his pride, and aid him in carrying out his hostile 
designs against republicanism. 

4th. To secure the influence of the office for one of his 
own instruments. . 

In this attempt to control his fellow-citizens through their 
fears, the senator underestimated the manhood of his native 
state. None, however, need now be alarmed at his power. 
It has exhausted its force on me. The bad passions 
lurking beneath the oily surface of the wily and rotten pohti- 
cian have violently leaped forth, and exposed his real charac- 
ter. The Connecticut Machiavel is well understood, now, at 
Washincrton. With months of unscrupulous and secret effort, 
and by the prostitution of his official position, he succeeded 
in preventing my confirmation ; but he failed to secure the 
appointment of one of his instruments to the place. 

HOW HE OBTAINED HIS RE-ELECTION TO THE SENATE. 

It is a mystery to many both in and out of the state how 
Mr Dixon was returned to the Senate by the republican 
party, when he has manifested such a want of sympathy with 
its ideas and sentiments. This mystery is easily solved: 
Whilst the earnest and true men of the party have been busy 
inculcating its faith and in developing its power, he has been 
studying, solely, how to appropriate that power to his own 
aggrandizement. And by means of systematic deception, and 
the active and wily eff^orts of a few pensioned retainers, scat- 



tered over the state, lie lias been enabled to circumvent the 
men of principle, seize our party machinery and by it force 
himself into his present position. The " Sumner letter " 
(hereafter mentioned), and the " two term" plea, by which 
his friends claimed a person must be re-elected once to save 
him from disgrace, with the intimidation of Federal office 
holders, and a profusion of promises of favor to others, were 
among the potent means used in securing his re-election. 

But if there had been timely and concerted action among 
those opposed to his re-election, he certainly could not have 
obtained it, notwithstanding the extraordinary means employ- 
ed by him. The sentiment of the party was decidedly against 
him. Gov. Buckingham, the representative of the radical 
republicans of the state, had just been re-elected by over 
9000 majority. 

Here, in Hartford, the home of the Senator, where his real 
character and views are best known, he could not, for some 
time previous to his re-election, have obtained a majority of 
the republican votes /or anij office, however humble. I think 
no Hartford man will be bold enough to deny this. Our city 
and town nominations, as well as those for the legislature, 
were made that year upon the distinct issue of support or op- 
position to the Senator, and in every instajice, his friends were 
voted down by a large majority, though personally unobjec- 
tionable. 

HIS REAL POLITICAL CHARACTER. 

It is well known that I have had a long and somewhat in- 
timate intercourse with Mr. Dixon. And that for my friend- 
ly disposition towards him I suffered much reproach from 
leading republicans, who had ceased to repose confidence in 
him. But this intercourse finally produced upon my own 
mind the most painful and reluctant convictions. I was 
forced to the conclusion that his sympathies were not with 
his own section, but were with the Southern oligarchy. 
That he was really hostile to our benificent political faith. 
That he hated republicanism for its humanity, and its self- 
sacrificing devotion to principle. That he had no faith in the 
political integrity of his fellow-men, but believed that " every 



9 

man had his price," and that the political independence of 
men depended upon their pecuniary circumstances — that his 
only interest in the republican party was in its power, which 
he desired to use solely for the gratification of his own pride 
and ambition, and to defraud the sentiment of Ids state. 

These were not hasty conclusions, but were reached gradu- 
ally and reluctantly. 

These convictions obliged me to declare myself opposed to 
his re-election to the Senate. And this, in fact, is the chief 
cause of his hostility. We have had no personal differences. 
My differences with him have been purely political, not per- 
sonal. And if he considers these personal, it is because his 
politics are personal. It has always appeared difficult for 
him to comprehend how a man's political action can be govern- 
ed by an earnest and animating political faith. 

His political character is one chosen by himself, and I only 
give its indications, that it may not be misunderstood : 

HIS POLITICAL COURSE REVIEWED. 

Read his speech of December, 1860, raving at the people 
of Connecticut for not humbling themselves to the Southern 
aristocracy, and submitting to its arrogant demands. Though 
worded cautiously, that is its true meaning. All recollect 
the exultant shouts of our enemies over it throughout the 
land. I earnestly labored to have him repair the injurious 
effect of this speech, but in vain. His affiliation and sympa- 
thy with Slidell, Clay of Alabama, Thompson of Mississippi, 
and other leaders of the rebellion, while they were in Wash- 
ington, is notorious there. It was however necessary for him 
to vote with the republicans in the Senate, occasionally, to re- 
tain his power at home, in view of a re-election. And now, 
also, to secure some of the patronage of the administration, 
with which to pay his retainers. 

THE BLAIK LETTER. 

A little more than one year ago the loyal citizens of Hart- 
ford filled our city hall, at the call of our republican town 
committee, to remonstrate against the support given by the 



10 

administration to the Hartford Times. The meeting declared 
unanimously " that it was the most disloyal paper in New 
England." It also denounced, hj a large majority^ the dis- 
loyal conduct of i\\Q j)ost7nasier,m persistently sustaining that 
establishment, and for insolently defying the loyal sentiment 
of the town. It appealed to Senator Dixon to vindicate the 
cause of loyalty by procuring the withdrawal of the govern- 
ment patronage from that paper, and the removal of the post- 
master. A committee was also appointed, of our leading 
citizens, to urge such action upon him, which it did. In re- 
sponse to this patriotic appeal. Senator Dixon sent to our 
papers for publication, on the eve of our state election, a letter 
signed by P. M. General Blair, and addressed to him, rebuk- 
ing the meeting, and indorsing the Times and the democratic 
leaders of this state, in the following language : 

" Since the rebellion broke out there has been no division 
of sentiment between old parties on the question of maintain- 
ing the Union ; and that the Hartford Times, and the leaders 
of the democratic organization generally, sustain the admin- 
istration as unfalteringly in its determination to maintain the 
Union as the leaders of the republican organization " ! ! 

It is believed that Senator Dixon inspired this letter, if he 
did not write it. Its sentiments are almost identical with 
those expressed by him to the committee of our citizens. His 
relations with the postmaster-general, were commanding, be-, 
ing a member of the post office committee of the senate. No 
one acquainted with these relations can doubt that he could 
have accomplished all that the loyal citizens of his town had 
asked. At any rate, he could have prevented the appear- 
ance of this letter if he had so desired, by pointing out to 
the postmaster-general its gross errors, and inducing him 
to withdraw it. But he hurried it forward for publication, 
and it first appeared in his own organ here, ( Courant,') with 
an approving introduction ! And thus was a most powerful 
weapon placed in the hands of the enemies of the administra- 
tion to strike down its friends ! 

Later developments plainly indicate the Senator's hostility 
to our cause. In his private conversations, his words have 



11 

jittle cheer but for the enemies of the Government. He ex- 
presses his doubts of its ability to suppress the rebellion ; he 
complains of the confiscation act ; stigmatizes Republicans as 
"Abolitionists ;" charges to them the troubles of the country, 
and he appears more anxious to have the "radicals" put 
down than the rebels, or their supporters in our midst. And 
McClellan is glorified by him long after he is superseded, if 
not even now. 

How can any one reconcile such conduct with fidelity to 
the Government, and to the party which chiefly sustains it ? 

On the eve of our late canvass, with such fearful issues be- 
fore us, when every effort was necessary to maintain Federal 
authority in our State, and secure public order, Senator Dixon 
saw fit to throw into our ranks another bomb-shell well calcu- 
lated to produce disaster, in using the influence of his official 
position to strike down a fellow-citizen, acknowledged by him 
to be a zealous supporter of the Government, and this, too, 
solely for the gratification of his personal feelings and views. 
Earnest friends of our cause appealed to him to desist for its 
sake, but in vain. He exhibited neither anxiety for our 
cause, nor a conciliatory spirit towards me. 

In palliation of the Senator's conduct in this case, his 
friends represent that I provoked this assault by repelling his 
conciliatory propositions. He made no such advances to me, 
in any form, or through any channel. Nor has he ever in- 
formed me that lie had been personally aggrieved by me. 
We last separated as personal friends, as I supposed — nearly a 
year ago — since which we have had no personal intercourse. 

The Senator himself appeals to a sentiment of revenge, for 
justification in this matter, in alleging, as he does industri- 
ously, that I " defied " his power. But this statement, like 
the preceding one, is an invention to shield him from the con- 
sequences of his act. 

But what doctrine do these pretexts shamelessly proclaim ? 
Is it not that a person has the right to use a public trust for 
private purposes ? 



12 



HOW HE OBTAINED THE SUMNER ENDORSEMENT. 

I am aware that just preceding his re-election he sustained 
some of the " radical " measures before the Senate. And I 
am likewise aware, that in consequence of this, Charles Sum- 
ner was induced to give a letter, saying that he thought the 
" cause of freedom " required Mr. Dixon's re-election. And 
this letter was effectively used in securing his re-election. 
But the " cause of freedom " and Mr. Dixon have known but 
little of each other since that event. 

And as if to relieve himself of the taint of Republicanism 
from this contact with Mr. Sumner, and his re-election by a 
Republican Legislature, he hastened, after his re-election, to 
introduce into the Senate a set of resolutions the opposite in 
principle to those pending in the Senate introduced by Mr. 
Sumner himself. These resolutions, though cunningly word- 
ed, were felt at Washington to be hostile in spirit to the Ad- 
ministration. They were exultingly copied by the Hartford 
Times and that class of papers generally, and gave much aid 
and comfort to the enemies of the Government. 

HIS WEAKENING INFLUENCE ON THE PARTY. 

Senator Dixon has contributed nothing to the strength of 
the Republican party in Connecticut, though he has seized its 
highest honors. And I appeal, with confidence, to the judg- 
ment of every reflecting Republican in the State, if his influ- 
ence npon the party has not been, constantly, baneful and 
depressing, instead of stimulating and encouraging. His 
doubtful position on vital questions before the Senate has 
alarmed the whole country, and subjected you to reproach 
and humilintion for having such a questionable representative. 
Having no confidence in any but the baser motives of men, 
these only has he appealed to for the accomplishment of his 
schemes at home, and in this way he has degraded the po- 
litical morals of our State, and prevented his votaries from 
having a just comprehension of the nobler spirit and higher 
purposes of our party. This is one of the principal causes of 
the poor progress of Republicanism in this State, and a reason 



13 

why we have had to struggle from year to year, at such an 
immense expenditure of labor and means, to save the State. 

Massachusetts, lying by our side, has a Senator Wilson — a 
true representative in all places of her humanity, her faith, 
her courage and her manhood — her genuine Republicanism. 
His heart is in the cause, and his influence ever elevathig and 
inspiring. She maintains her Republican ascendancy with 
but little effort. 

Connecticut has a Senator Dixon whose whole influence is 
exerted to degrade her sentiment and crush out her vital Re- 
publicanism — her animating spirit. And our ascendancy in 
the State is maintained only by exhausting struggles and the 
palpably bad cause of our opponents. Preceding each of our 
last three State elections, he has struck such a blow at the 
party as was calculated to distract and defeat it — first, his 
Dec. '60 speech ; the next year, the " Blair letter," which he 
threw into the canvass, and this year, the act discussed in this 
address. No open enemy ni the State has inflicted so much 
injury upon the cause of RepubHcanism and loyalty. 

HIS FUTURE DESIGNS THURLOW WEED PLOT. 

The rebels occasionally use our National flag to more 
effectually strike down its brave defenders. And for a simi- 
lar purpose Senator Dixon may, for the present, continue to 
use our noble Republican banner, especially as we have again 
carried the State. But be no longer deceived, Republicans, 
for he is instinctively and bitterly hostile to your generous and 
inspiring faith, and is aiming, stealthily, at the destruction of 
your organization. Leading Republicans in Washington as- 
sured me it was their firm conviction that he was in the 
" Thurlow Weed combination " to destroy the Republican 
party and form a new organization, upon the basis of a com- 
promise with the rebels. Those engaged in this plot are gen- 
erally known as " conservatives." I promised our friends 
there to warn you of this plot, and do now earnestly warn 
you ! 



14 



CONCLUSION. 

The act of the Senate proclaiming that a citizen''s first fealty 
is due to his Senator instead of his Government, and also that 
a Senator from his position is infallible, and therefore his 
statements against a citizen must not be questioned, because 
it would be an assault upon the dignity of the Senate, and the 
fact tliat such doctrines were used to make the Senate the in- 
strument of the personal malice and private views of a Sena- 
tor, is a sad part of the history of tlie country. And every 
man who respects the Constitution of his country, and desires 
to preserve his own rights, must resist such a flagrant attempt 
to overthrow his liberty and convert him into a vassal. 

But if the future welfare of the organization upon which 
the Government now mainly depends for its support would 
permit it, and the historian could overlook the humiliating 
fact, that in the midst of the severest struggle of the nation 
for its life, and civil war threatening even his own State, Con- 
necticut had one Senator so indiiferent to the perils of his 
country, tliat he employed his time and his official influence, 
nearly an entire session of Congress, to the persecution of one 
of his fellow-citizens, for being more devoted to the Govern- 
ment than to him, I would, for the honor of our State, have 
cheerfully drawn a thick veil over the political character and 
acts of Senator Dixon. 

MARK HOWARD. 

Hartford, April, 1863. 



APPEI^DIX. 



Remonstrance presented to the Senate by Hon. 
L. S. Foster. 

To the Honorable Lafayette S. Foster, and other Senators of the Unit- 
ed States : 

Gentlemen : We have heard with surprise and regret that ob- 
jection is made to the appointment of Mark Howard, Esq., who has 
been nominated by the President for Collector of Internal Revenue 
in this District. From a long and thorough acquaintance with Mr. 
Howard, we are confident such opposition can not rest upon any valid 
grounds, and we trust it will not be successful. 

His high reputation for financial ability, moral integrity, and patri- 
otic devotion rendered the nomination of Mr. Howard highly accept- 
able to the Republican party in Connecticut; and the admirable man- 
ner in which he has performed the duties of the office, delicate and 
difficult as they were, at the commencement, has gained for him the 
confidence and good will of the tax-payers, and secured the marked 
approbation of the head of the Department at "Washington. 

In our opinion, the ftiilure to confirm his nomination would be a 
serious injury to the public interests, and a severe blow to the friends 
of the Union in this State. No man has been more faithful in the 
support of our National and State administrations during these times 
that "try men's souls" than Mark Howard. And now, on the eve of 
our State election, if he is struck down, the effect will be discouraging, 
perhaps disastrous. Not that it will affect his political action ; he is 
not the man to suffer private griefs or private piques to swerve him 
from the path of duty; but many who know his moral worth, his noble 
patriotism, and his efficient labors, if they see him sacrificed will feel 
that our cause is weakened, and the right has suffered. We can not 



16 



afford to be thus weakened, 

your aid to prevent it. 

Wm. W. Ellsworth, - 

H. A. Perkins, - - - 

H. K. W. Welch, - 

John L. Bunce, - - - 

Thomas Belknap, 

James Goodwin, - - - 

C. H. Brainard, 

T. C. Perkins, - 

Chas. E. Perkins, 

J. L. Strong, - _ _ 

Alfred Smith, - 

A. G. Hammond, - - - 

Albert Day, - 

James G. Bolles, - - - 

Calvin Day, - - - 

Lucius Barbour, - - - 

O. G. Terry, - 

Geo. M.Bartholomew, - 

J. A. Butler, - - - 

E. N. Kellogg & Co., - 

John C. Tracy, 

Austin Dunham & Co., - 

Hillyer & Bunce, 

J. F. Judd & Co., - 

Ives, Blanchard & Co., 

Collins Bros. & Co., 

Thomas T. Fisher, - 

Chas. D. Warner, 

E. Flower & Co., 

Cheney Bros., - - . 

Olcott Allen, - - - - 

G. F. Davis, 

S. L. Loomis, - - - . 

James B. Ilosmer, 

Case, Lockwood & Co., - 

T. M. Allyn, 

C. T. Hillyer, - - - - 

Owen, Day & Root, 

Hartford, Feb. 18, 1863. 

[Senator Foster stated to the Senate, from his own knowledge 
of the signers of the above remonstrance, and from examination, that 
they represented between $20,000,000 and $30,000,000 of property.] 



and we earnestly and respectfully invoke 

- [Ex. Gov.] 
[Pres't Hartford Bank.] 

- [State Senator.] 
[Pres't Phoenix Bank.] 

- [Pres't State Bank.] 
[Pres't Conn. Mutual Life Ins. Co.] 

- [Wholesale Merchant, &c.] 
[Attorney.] 

- [Pres't City Council.] 
[Attornej'.] 

- [Ex. Pres't Conn. River Bank-] 
[Pres't E.xchange Bank.] 

- [Ex. Lieut. Gov.— Day, Griswold & Co.] 
[Present U. S. Collector.] 

- [Day, Owen & Co.] 
[Wholesale Merchant] 

- [Pres't MtnsL Bank.] 
[Pres't Hartford County Bank.] 

- [Pres't Conn. River Bank.] 
[Merchants and Manufacturers.] 

- [Pres't Farmer's and IMechanic's Bank.]. 
[Merchants and Manufacturers.] 

- [Wholesale IMerchants.] 
[Wholesale ]Merchants.] 

- [Wholesale Merchants.] 
[Wholesale Merchants.] 

- [Merchant and Manufacturer.] 
[Editor of " Press."] 

- [Merchants.] 
[Silk Manufacturers.] 

■ [Treas'r Soc. Savings.] 
[Pres't City Bank.] 

■ [Pres't Phoenix Ins. Co.] 
[Pres't Soc. Savings.] 

• [Printers.] 

[Pres't Hartford Carpet Co.] 
[Pres't Charter Oak Bank.] 
[Wholesale Merchants.] 



I 



17 

In addition to this remonstrance, numero'is letters were sent to 
senators by the leading tax-payers of the district, urging the confirm- 
ation of the nominee, and protesting against the course of Senator 
Dixon. 



COMMENTS OF THE PRESS. 

From the Hartford Press, Feb. 20. 
The community learn with great astonishment that Senator Dixon 
lias succeeded in preventing the confirmation of Mark Howard, Esq., 
collector of this district, in the Senate. We forbear comment for the 
present, hoping that the Republican Senators will reconsider their ac- 
tion at this critical time in our State politics. We can not undei-stand 
how the Senate has been induced to strike down one of the truest 
-friends of the government in this State, without some gross deception 
has been used. 



From the N. Y. Tribune, Feb. 23. 
Mr. Mark Howard, who was nominated for Collector of Internal 
Revenue for the Hartford District, Conn., has been rejected in the 
Senate. Reason : of the two classes of Republicans — those who be- 
came such because their understandings and hearts accepted the prin- 
ciples of the party, and those who reluctantly joined the party because 
they had nowhere else to go — he belongs to the former. Nobody 
dare risk a doubt of his capacity or his integrity ; but he was a Re- 
publican from the start, while others clung to the Whig party till after 
it was dead, and then took refuge in Know Nothingism till it, too, 
dissolved, and then made their way reluctantly and sullenly to the 
Republican life-boat; and these are now ^^conservative" and can't 
abide those who were Republicans when they might have been some- 
thing else. By the influenceof these, aided by the vote of every Sena- 
tor who frankly hates the Republican cause and name, Mr. Howard has 
been rejected. Happily, he had lived usefully and honorably a good 
many years before he received this, his first political office ; and he 
will continue so to live, and to pay his debts at the rate of one hun- 
dred cents on the dollar, if he never gets another. If the office can 
do without him as well as he can without the office, there need be no 
tears shed. Yet it is aggravating that men who are Republicans on 
compulsion, should be able, under Republican rule, to exclude from 
office good men who are Republicans by free choice. 
2 



18 



WHAT THEY THINK ABROAD. 

The appointment of Mark Howard, as collector under the federal 
law for the Hartford district, has been rejected by the Senate, at the 
instance of Senator Dixon. This is extraordinary and outrageous. 
Mr. Howard is one of the most worthy of men — an earnest Republi- 
can and a capable and honest officer. Only pure personal matters 
could have led Mr. Dixon to get him rejected. — Springfield Rep. 

The intention of this action of Senator Dixon on the eve of our 
election is too evident. We shall not gratify him by agitating the 
matter at present. — Press, Feb. 21. 



From the Hartford Post, Feb. 28. 

The telegraph says that the Senate wasted three hours, Thursday, in a 
fight over the nomination of two collectors, one of them, Mark Howard, 
of this city, being opposed by Senator Dixon, This opposition to Mr. 
Howard is foolish and contemptible. It is a part of the scheme to 
divide the sentiment of the friends of the government in Connecticut, 
which has been concocted in the Courant otfice by a gang of two-penny 
politicians, who hive there, and of which James Dixon is the head 
and A. N. Clark the tail. It is a part of the working of this high- 
minded tribe, who oppose Mr. Howard, and are not altogether friend- 
ly to Gov. Buckingham because the Governor and Mr. Howard are 
fast friends. Believe us, if Mr. Dixon would pay half the attentions 
to the wants of his country that he does to the wants of his office-seek- 
ing friends, he would do himself honor and achieve everlasting fame. 
Let him be a patriot instead of a politician. All of which is respect- 
fully submitted. 



From the New York Tribune. 
NOMINATIONS AND REJECTIONS. 

The recent contest in the Senate over the nomination of Mark 
Howard as collector of internal revenue in the Hartford district, 
Conn., involves priaciples and consequences so grave that they ought 
not to elude popular attention. We shall endeavor fairly and fully to 
indicate them. 

James Dixon and Mark Howard are both residents of Hartford, 
and both act with the republican party. Mr. Howard was one of the 
founders of the party, and has ever been a thorough, enthusiastic, 



19 

hard-woi'king champion of its principles. Mr. Dixon became a re- 
publican when there was no longer any "whig" or "American" party 
remaining, and when there was no remaining choice but between the 
"republican," and the "democratic" parties. Of course, he is now a 
^^conservative" republican, and regards Mr. Howard as "radical." 
Of course, he has held the best office in the gift of the republicans ot 
Connecticut ever since they had any to give; and of course Mr 
Howard never held any at all till last fall, when the President made 
him collector of internal revenue as aforesaid. We do not complain 
of this disparity— it is the way things usually go. Both senator and 
collector are good citizens, responsible and capable business men, and 
blameless in all their private and social relations. Their only differ- 
ence is one of principle ; and this led Mr. Howard to oppose Mr. 
Dixon's election (or a reelection) as Senator. In return, Mr. Dixon 
— in opposition to his colleague, to the great mass of republicans of 
Hartford, and especially to the property and intelligence of that city, 
has — by enlisting the congenial support of the anti-republican sena- 
tors — secured Mr. Howard's rejection as collector. 

The secretary of the treasury, who knows how thoroughly and ad- 
mirable has been Mr. Howard's performance of his official duties, 
ardently desires his confirmation. So did the secretary of navy, who, 
when at home, is the neighbor and friend of both Messrs. Dixon and 
Howard. Senator Foster presented a petition from Hai'tford for that 
confirmation signed by only thirty-eight names, which he stated, rep- 
resented property to the amount of twenty millions of dollars. The 
finance committee of the senate unanimously recommended that con- 
firmation. Yet it was defeated, solely because Mr. Howard was a 
radical republican, and was not a supporter of the personal fortunes 
of Senator Dixon. No republican voted to reject him for any other 
reason. It was assumed that a senator's will should be omnipotent 
with regard to appointments in his own locality, and that whoever he 
opposed he should be rejected. We should not like to see nominees 
in Senators Powell, Wall, Turpie, Richardson, and Carlile's localities 
respectively submitted to that test. And we hold that a senator has 
no right to oppose a nomination on grounds essentially personal to 
himself. If the nominee is unworthy, reject him; but not merely 
because he is of another school or stratum of the party from your own. 
No opposition having been made to Mr. Howard's confirmation till 
it came up for final action in the senate, his friends were taken by 
surprise by the allegations of personal antipathy and active hostility 
made by Mr. Dixon, and asked a recommitment to afford opportunity 



20 

for rebutting testimony. This was twisted into an ini])euchment of 
the veracity of a senator, and on tliat ground refused. We deem that 
a most unwarranted stretch of prerogative where the rights and inter- 
ests of an absent citizen are at stake. 

We hear that a motion has been made to remove the injunction of 
secrecy from the proceedings in tliis case, and we trust it may prevail. 



From the Hartford Press, March 4. 
MARK HOWARD. 

It will be seen by his card, given elsewhere, that the official duties 
of our excellent collector, Murk Howard, Esq., terminate to-day. 
And we are sure the announcement will be read with regret by all 
who have had business relations with him. It Avill not be possible for 
his successor to transact the business of his office with more promptness,- 
fidelity to the government and courtesy to the tax-payers. He leaves 
his business in admirable order. Every cent of the taxes laid for 
September, October, November and December has been collected; 
and all the tax for January would have been paid at this date if the 
collector had not been interrupted. And there has not been a distraint 
made, nor a single harsh measure used. 

Neither the government nor this district can affiDrd to lose the 
services of such a man. But his rejection by the Senate does not 
impair his standing in this community; the manner in which it was 
accomplislied brings no disgrace upon Mm. In rejecting him the 
Senate were governed by the most outrageous principle, that a man's 
fitness for the office has nothing to do with his confirmation ; the 
enmity of a single senator outweighs all that. And the President is 
openly insulted. His every appointment must be dictated by some 
member of the Senate. It has heretofore been supposed that the 
President made the appointments, and the Senate confirmed them, 
unless there was something in the business or moral character of the 
nominee which unfitted him for the appointment. The people may 
well be alai-med at this despotism for personal injury, which the 
Senate bands itself together to practice. 



From the Boston Congregationlist, March 6, 
PERSONAL. 

If the papers report Senator Dixon of Conn, correctly, he has done 
a very small thing, and a very mean thing, in securing the defeat in 
the Senate, of the nomination of Mr. Mark Howard of Hartford, as 



21 

Collector of Internal Rt venue for the District of Hartford. Mr. 
Howard has held the office some months, and has performed its duties 
admirably, but because he was a radical Republican, and personally- 
distasteful to Senator Dixon, the latter secured his defeat. 



From the New York. Independent, March 12. 
POLITICAL. 

Mark Howard, Esq., an energetic Republican on uncompromising 
principle, was nominated for the Collectorship of Hartford district in 
Conn , and was rejected in the Senate, avowedly by the personal 
eftbrts of Senator Dixon of that state, a personal enemy. This afl'air, 
trilling in itself, excites considerable attention as a bold manifestation ' 
of a most dangerous political practice. It is as much as to say that 
the people shall lose the services of valuable public officers whenever 
a revengeful trading politician chooses to punish them. 



From the Springfield llepublican, April 17. 
Mark Howard, rejected as federal collector of taxes at Hartford by 
Senator Dixon's iniiuence, has published a history of the case, and a 
review of the senator's political career and position. It is quite 
effiective and damaging, both against Mr. Dixon and the majority of 
the Senate. 



From the Democrat, (St. Louis,) April 17th. 
FEDERAL APPOINTMENTS. 

The case of Mark Howard, of Hartford, Connecticut, elicited con- 
siderable remark a few weeks ago, from the eastern press. The in- 
terest of the case is likely to be renewed, and from what we understand 
from remarks in Hartford journals there will be an attempt, since the elec- 
tion in the state of Connecticut, to repair the wrong done in the mat- 
ter. The facts are these. Mark Howard was appointed Collector of 
Internal Revenue in the Hartford, Conn,, District, but his nomination 
was rejected by the senate, at the special instance of Senator Dixon 
of Connecticut, on purely political grounds. What these grounds were 
can easily be inferred from the following paragraph taken from the 
New York Tribune: 

"James Dixon and Mark Howard are both residents of Hartford 
and both act with the Republican party. Mr. Howard was one of the 
founders of the party, and has ever been a thorough, enthusiastic, 
liard-working champion of its principles. Mr. Dixon became a Re- 
publican when there was no longer any 'Whig' or 'American' party 
remaining, and when there was no remaining choice but between the 



22 

' Republican ' and the 'Democratic' parties. Of course he is now a 
^conservative^ Republican, and regards Mr. Howard as 'radical.' Of 
course he has held the best office in the gift of the Republicans of 
Connecticut ever since they had any to give ; and of course Mr. How- 
ard never held any at all till last Fall, when the president made him 
Collector of Internal Revenue, as aforesaid. We do not complain of 
this disparity — it is the way things usually go. Both senator and col- 
lector are good citizens, responsible and capable business men, and 
blameless in all their private and social relations. Their only differ- 
ence is one of principle." 

The sin of which Mr. Howard was guilty, and which occasioned his 
rejection for office, was radicalism. That this is regarded as no very 
heinous offense by the people of Connecticut, appears from the result 
of the recent election in that state; and that it is looked upon in a 
similar light by the people in a good many other localities — St. Louis 
included — is made ver'y apparent in the same manner. Since the ex- 
hibition made of their strength by the Radicals of Connecticut in the 
splendid victory they have recently achieved over the Copper-heads 
in that state, it would seem that they begin to entertain the determina- 
tion that their opinions shall no longer be held cause of disqualification 
for official preferment, and in this we hope they will persevere. 

Precisely the same principle is involved in the case of the federal 
appointments in this city and state. The appointees to civil position 
by the government are nearly all conservatives, while a very decided 
majority of the loyal people who support the government and the ad- 
ministration of President Lincoln are Radicals, as was conclusively 
shown in the last two elections. The office-holders in St. Louis rep- 
resent a party, which to-day scarcely musters a corporal's guard of 
supporters outside of their own number. Yet, notwithstanding their 
utter want of popular strength, these conservative gentlemen exhibit 
the same narrow and despicable prescriptive spirit which was so glar- 
ingly exhibited by Senator Dixon in the case of Mark Howard. * * 



From the New York Independent, April 23d. 
Mark Howard, Esq., a thoroughly and vigorously war Republi- 
can, was nominated as collector of the Hartford (Conn.) district. He 
was rejected by the senate, not because he was unfit for the place, but 
in consequence of the personal enmity of Senator Dixon, of Connect- 
icut, who thus deliberately gratifies private mahce at the expense of 
pubhc good. Mr. Howard has printed a circumstantial account of 
this singular affiiir, which the culpable senator does not yet venture to 
deny. Let it be remembered that this matter is significant, not on ac- 
count of Mr. Howard, but because it shows how dangerously an un- 



23 

principled politician in office can attack the very basis of our frame of 
government. Such machinations as these of Dixon's are every whit 
as bad as Floyd's and Toucey's were, though in a different way. 



From the Galena (Illinois) Daily Advertiser, April 21st. 
MARK HOWARD. 

The case of our friend, Mai-k Howard, at Hartford, Conn., contin- 
ues to excite attention and discussion. It should do so, for things of 
that kind should not be permitted to occur without a good reason can 
be given for their so happening. Mr. Howard was one of the found- 
ers of the Republican party in Connecticut, a man of fine business 
capacity, of good habits and unquestioned character as a man. He is 
an earnest and far-sighted politician, who from the commencement of 
our national difficulties weighed their magnitude and had the courage 
to grapple with them unflinchingly. Because of this, Mark Howard's 
nomination for Collector of Internal Revenue in the Hartford District 
was rejected by the senate ! This rejection was brought about through 
the influence of James Dixon, one of the Connecticut United States 
senators, who calls Mr. Howard a "radical," because he is in favor of 
defending the country by all the means that God has given, from the 
infamous assassins who are clutching at its throat. Mr. Dixon and 
all like him must learn before they are many years older, that this 
war is not to be ended, nor is the country to be most benefited by this 
course. A man's zeal for his country must not be effectually used 
against him to debar him from honorable distinction — used by the rep- 
resentatives of the states which that out-spoken zeal alone can save to 
the Union. 



From the Detroit Advertiser and Tribune, April 23d. 
JANUS-FACEDNESS. 

Mark Howard, Esq., of Hartford, is a gentleman very well known 
in this section of the country, the earlief part of his life having been 
spent in this vicinity, and is at present a very prominent citizen of 
Connecticut. He is one of the original Republicans in that state, and 
has ever been a radical and uncompromising adherent of Republican 
principles. James Dixon, at present senator from the same state, is a 
politician, more selfish than honest, formerly a fogy conservative, lat- 
terly a moderate Republican, because that was the winning side, and 
in no way a fit exponent of Republican principles. Mr. Howard re- 
fused to aid the efforts of Mr. Dixon to obtain a re-election to the 
senate, on account of his political unfitness, and thereby secured that 



24 

gentleman's enmity. Mr. Howard's valuable services secured his 
nomination as Collector of his district under the Internal Revenue 
Law. Mr. Dixon defeated his confirmation in the senate on the ground 
that each senator should control the nominations in his own section, 
and by pledging senators who were unacquainted with Mr. Howard or 
the circumstances of the case, and against the strenuous efforts of 
Senator Foster, of the same state. No one has ever attempted to deny 
Mr. Howard's entire fitness for the place, and the only motive for his 
rejection was the personal hatred of Senator Dixon. Democratic 
senators aided largely in producing this result, and in throwing over 
a sterling republican to gratify a Janus-faced politician. We are glad 
for the honor of our senate that such contemptible exhibitions of mean 
spite are rare. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

■11 

014 110 539^ < 



